Martin v. Lower Coast Const. Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the rights of pro per defendants must be balanced against resource constraints of the prison
• holding that a defendant is not entitled to either a good-faith or a reliance instruction where an adequate instruction on specific intent is given
• concluding that, while pro se defendant’s “access to discovery materials was hardly optimal, ... the limitations imposed on him were reasonable”
• explaining that a theory of the defense “involves the assertion of a legal, as opposed to a factual, defense to the charge”
• noting that proof of a 4 bank’s reliance is not an element of § 1014 and therefore the complicity of bank officers is no 5 defense
• holding single improper comment by prosecutor regarding defendant’s failure to testify did not mandate reversal when comment did not invite jury to infer guilt from silence and judge gave jurors curative instruction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).